Return to Transcripts main page

Laura Coates Live

DOJ Asks Judge To Unseal Grand Jury Testimony In Epstein Case; House Republicans Weigh Vote On Epstein Files; U.S. Citizen Arrested During ICE Raid; Laura Coates And Guests Discussed The Story Behind Colbert Cancellation; Company Breaks Silence Over CEO's Viral Coldplay Moment. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired July 18, 2025 - 23:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

DAN KOH, FORMER WHITE HOUSE DEPUTY CABINET SECRETARY UNDER PRESIDENT BIDEN: Happens all the time. Unfortunately, get caught too much.

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR AND SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Pete?

PETE SEAT, FORMER WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMAN FOR FORMER PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: North Korea but with an asterisk. If Dennis Rodman asks me to go on one of his basketball missions, I'm going.

PHILLIP: Well, on that note, everybody, thank you very much for being here. Roy Wood, of course, will be back on Saturday night starting September 6th. Mark your calendars.

ROY WOOD, COMEDIAN, ACTOR: Donald Trump, please don't cancel me.

PHILLIP: See the third season of "Have I Got News for You." Three seasons? Wow, that's crazy. Right here on CNN. And he has a new memoir out, "The Man of Many Fathers." It's going on sale in October.

Thanks so much for watching "NewsNight." "Laura Coates Live" is right now.

LAURA COATES, CNN HOST: Well, tonight, the Jeffrey Epstein controversy is now moving to the courts. A very familiar arena, I might add, for President Donald J. Trump, who is keenly aware of how slow the American legal system can be. He has used it to his benefit for, well, many, many times before. The question now is whether that will happen again, the delay.

Today, Attorney General Pam Bondi made a request that could take weeks or even months or potentially even longer to fulfill if at all. She officially asked a judge to unseal the normally secret grand jury transcripts from the Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell cases. This would be the official witness testimony that the grand jurors heard before deciding to indict based on probable cause.

Reading from the filing now. Public officials, lawmakers, pundits, and ordinary citizens remain deeply interested and concerned about the Epstein matter. The time for the public to guess what they contain should end.

But the relentless calls that Trump has faced to release the so-called Epstein files were never really about just those grand jury transcripts which, frankly, would be a fraction of what exists overall. It has always been about the thousands of other documents the DOJ has in its possession. And tonight, there are questions about the review that DOJ conducted

this very year.

Senator Dick Durbin says that his office received information that suggests the FBI used 1,000 staffers in March -- you heard that right -- 1,000 staffers in March to review 100,000 Epstein-related records. Senator Durbin says, my office was told that these personnel were instructed to flag any records in which President Trump was mentioned. Senator Durbin is asking the FBI to explain why.

We reached out to DOJ for comment but have not heard back. You'd think that some in MAGA world should be curious about that detail since they've been demanding full transparency about anything to do with the files. But for now, it appears that they are circling the wagons, defending President Trump from that Wall Street Journal report that says a birthday letter bearing Trump's name was given to friend, Jeffrey Epstein, way back in 2003.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHARLIE KIRK, POLITICAL ACTIVIST, AUTHOR, PODCAST HOST: This thing was obviously a hit job, obviously a drive-by shooting trying to go after President Trump.

STEVE BANNON, FORMER WHITE HOUSE CHIEF STRATEGIST: -- come after Trump. And last night, they tried to actually destroy him with what looks like a phony and fake letter. President Trump has put him on blast.

JACK POSOBIEC, POLITICAL ACTIVIST: The MAGA hat stays on. All right? The MAGA hat stays on. The MAGA hat is fully on. We're locked in.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Now, Trump denied all of it. And today, he made good on his promise to sue "The Wall Street Journal" and its owner, Rupert Murdoch. The lawsuit says the story was false, defamatory, unsubstantiated, and disparaging. And Trump wants at least $20 billion in damages.

Their parent company at "The Wall Street Journal" telling CNN -- quote -- "We have full confidence in the rigor and accuracy of our reporting, and will vigorously defend against any lawsuit."

I want to bring in Adam Klasfeld, editor-in-chief and owner of All Rise News, Sarah Krissoff, former federal prosecutor at the Southern District of New York, and Dave Aronberg, former state attorney for Palm Beach County.

Adam, let me begin with you here because the DOJ's request, well, it says it will work with the SDNY who, of course, oversaw the prosecution, to make -- quote -- "appropriate redactions of victim- related information and other personal identifying information prior to releasing the transcripts." So, what exactly will these grand jury transcripts show and will any other names come up besides, say, Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, both of whom were actual defendants?

ADAM KLASFELD, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF AND OWNER, ALL RISE NEWS: Well, I think you hit the nail on the head, Laura, in your introduction where the grand jury minutes are just a fraction of the overall so-called Epstein files.

Now, they say they're going to cooperate with the Southern District of New York, the prosecuting district, with something that was interesting about that motion you just read.

[23:05:03]

It only bore the name of the attorney general, Pam Bondi, and the deputy, Todd Blanche. There was not a Southern District of New York prosecutor on that motion. Presumably, they're the people who would know how to protect victim information, know what is safe for release, won't compromise investigations.

There is actually a really interesting footnote in that motion saying that they're going to file similar motions in the Maxwell case, which is pending before -- has a pending petition for -- to hear her appeal before the Supreme Court, also wants to file a similar motion in the Southern District of Florida.

So, this -- it -- this motion raises those questions of what will be the participation of the Southern District and how might that affect those other cases.

COATES: Of course, Florida being because there was what was called a sweetheart deal once offered to him back when Democrats were initially looking at this issue several years ago.

Sarah, let's talk about the SDNY here and the point that was just raised because the SDNY is, of course, who has overseen this prosecution, was actually prosecuting this matter before Epstein died, and secure a conviction for Ghislaine Maxwell.

The judge is going to have to look through whatever they want to release, including redactions and making those decisions. This could take quite some time considering the judge's review and if they do, in fact, talk to the SDNY about how best to preserve the sensitive nature of some people's identities. Right?

SARAH KRISSOFF, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK: Yeah. I mean, the first thing that judge is going to do here is figure out whether there's really a legal basis to unseal these materials. I mean, the framework is structured to prevent their release.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

KRISSOFF: The attorney general and the deputy attorney general have had made this motion to ask for their release. The case law they rely on is pretty slim, actually. But there is a basis for the release of such materials under exceptional circumstances. I'm not sure that this is those exceptional circumstances.

COATES: Well, on that point, I want to just read from people for a moment on what they had to say. And I'll let you into this, Dave Aronberg, as well, because one of the things they talk about is the exception being, you know, essentially overwhelming public interest. But they're citing to public officials, lawmakers, pundits -- interesting -- and also ordinary citizens who remain deeply interested and concerned about the Epstein matter.

Dave, when you look at this and think about the reasons people obviously preserve the secrecy of a grand jury and because -- I mean, we all know there will be intimations and assumptions made by virtue of people's names even being raised in this. What do you make of the idea that this is the reason they're giving? Should this be enough for a judge to say, okay, pundits and ordinary citizens want to know, fine?

DAVE ARONBERG, FORMER STATE ATTORNEY, PALM BEACH COUNTY: Laura, probably not because grand jury secrecy is important. Judges aren't quick to let the public see these transcripts. In Florida, we had the same issue over the state grand jury transcript.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

ARONBERG: And the only reason why those were released to the public was because the legislature had to change the law. And once the law was changed that made a specific carve out for Epstein, then they could release it. So, at the federal level, they probably will not, but there's always that small chance that in the interest of justice, because this is such a unique case, they will.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

ARONBERG: But even if they are, we're talking about a portion of a portion. We're talking about whatever pertinent grand jury records can be released, and that's in the eye of the beholder.

So, look, the MAGA base wants files released. They're not clamoring for redacted version of the grand jury transcripts and only a pertinent redacted version at that. So, that's not going to please anyone.

COATES: Piecemeal could prove even more problematic. You're right. Adam, let me turn to this $20 billion request, shall we say, from the president, from "The Wall Street Journal" in the form of a lawsuit. Now, the bar for defamation for public officials is very high. You have to find actual malice as well. Do you see this particular lawsuit against "The Wall Street Journal" going anywhere or is this a kind of P.R. move from the president?

KLASFELD: Well, it -- one thing that came to mind immediately when I saw Donald Trump's statement, his denial of this, he talked about how the supposed -- that he didn't draw -- write drawings. COATES: Uh-hmm.

KLASFELD: Now, that was falsifiable. You know, there are pictures all over the internet about his drawings. And that reminded me of the E. Jean Carroll case. Now, when she filed that defamation lawsuit, she showed that when Trump issued a denial, he -- she said, I've never met this woman before in my life, and there was a picture that showed that wasn't true.

[23:10:05]

We might see the reverse happening here where this -- where we have all this evidence of "The Wall Street Journal" doing their due diligence. They reached out to other people mentioned in that story. The only person who denied the authenticity of these letters was Donald Trump, not Leslie Wexner, not Alan Dershowitz, who are mentioned in the files. It seems like it could absolutely be a P.R. move and it looks like "The Wall Street Journal" is staying up strong from their statement.

COATES: Well, we shall see how all of this unfolds. We'll be, obviously, watching. Thank you all.

I want to continue this conversation with David Cay Johnston, a professor, investigative journalist, and the author of several books about President Trump, including "The Big Cheat."

David, welcome. I mean, first, I want you to listen to how Steve Bannon is framing the latest twist, shall we say, in the Epstein saga.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BANNON: Quite frankly, the Murdochs concocted something last night and thought it'd be a kill shot on President Trump. And lo and behold, it's the exact opposite because President Trump is now on offense of what we said should be done. The Attorney General should go to the judge and release not just grand jury, but ask them to unveil all of the evidence, all of the sealed evidence. They should petition it to release all the sealed evidence. Right? And then there's much more they can do, but start with that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: I mean, just a few days ago, MAGA supporters were furious at Trump. Has this twist sort of calmed the storm in his base?

DAVID CAY JOHNSTON, PROFESSOR, INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST, AUTHOR: Well, it has allowed people who support Trump to try and confuse the issue, uh, and raise that the journal somehow did something baseless.

Now, uh, Trump spoke directly to Rupert Murdoch, said, I'm going to sue you if you go ahead. The journal would not have gone ahead unless they've got the goods. So, you can be assured they've got the goods. And Rupert Murdoch knows that you want to hold back a little bit. Uh, you'll get more stories out of this as it goes along when you finally make the documents available. The grand jury argument is also a ruse and it's designed to shift blame. The grand jury transcripts aren't going to tell you anything about what the MAGA base wants to know. What they want are flight logs, emails, and especially photographs, including the supposed Polaroids, that there has been testimony Epstein had of Donald Trump engaged with under -- at least one underaged girl.

The grand jury proceedings were to obtain indictments of the principal abuser here, Epstein, and his procurer, Maxwell, both of whom were convicted at trial during the Trump administration the first time around.

So, for MAGA, I think a lot of the effort is going to, if they're going to stay on this issue, is going to be why aren't you releasing the other information.

Pam Mondi, the attorney general, has all of the information. She can release all of it. There's no reason she can't. The grand jury testimony, however, would require, as you know, approval of a judge. It's unlikely because Maxwell is on appeal.

COATES: Well, you know, the drip, drip, drip approach here will undoubtedly have and raise more concerns. So, it might backfire in the end. Of course, there is certainly what the president is saying, that he does not believe that there is even truth in "The Wall Street Journal" reporting. He sued them for as much. He, of course, has been vehement about not being somebody who's a part of these files, but the stories will unfold as they will.

Trump defenders, David, though, they actually say that it's implausible that he would have written that letter or drew that illustration that's referenced in "The Wall Street Journal." His son, Don, Jr., claimed that he has never seen his dad doodle in his life. Trump has obviously signed drawings for charity before.

What do you make of the way he and his supporters are really so angered by this letter and defending the president over this particular issue given what's in the background of the allegations about Epstein?

CAY JOHNSTON: Well, hubris will get you every time. And just as in the E. Jean Carroll case, Trump tried to say, I've never met this woman, she's not my type, and then misidentified her as his second wife in a photograph. They're trying to get away with just saying it's not true. Just as they said the contact with the Russian emissaries who an email said the Kremlin wants to help you win in 2016, they denied that until the emails came out, and then they had to admit it.

And so, they're hoping here to do two things. Get the story to die down, not drip, drip, drip, no new developments, and Murdoch will see to it that there are some new developments.

[23:15:00]

And then secondly, to simply assert we did nothing wrong, there's nothing here, and hope they can get away with it. That's where the hubris comes in.

COATES: It sounds as though the reliance is that people will have a cumulative view on all the things he has been accused of and that will dictate how they view this latest story. I wonder how that's going to work given the fact that he overcame a lot of those allegations, whether even after convictions.

But David, let me just add that the lawsuit that he's here right now with "The Wall Street Journal," his attack of Rupert Murdoch as well, is it a sign that the alliance between Trump and Murdoch is officially broken?

CAY JOHNSTON: Well, I don't know if it's broken. But at the end of the day, Rupert Murdoch is a very savvy guy about his business.

And I think, Laura, the fundamental difference here you just touched upon, Donald Trump with Stormy Daniels, Donald Trump with adult women, that's one thing. There is a great deal of smoke about Donald Trump with girls as young as 13, and I don't think he can survive if there's solid evidence of that.

There may not be. It may be just smoke. But if there's solid evidence in those files, that would absolutely, I believe, sink Donald Trump. I don't believe even the strongest MAGA people would support having a serial child rapist in the Oval Office.

COATES: He has not been charged with those offenses. But, certainly, the intimations that you're suggesting, if included or referenced, would be very eye-opening for a judge to review the grand jury testimony. David, thank you so much.

CAY JOHNSTON: Thank you.

COATES: Still ahead, what about the effort on Capitol Hill to force a vote on the Epstein files? Well, the Republicans who signed on, are they going to stay the course on that issue or are they backing down?

Plus, Donald Trump celebrating the canceling of Stephen Colbert's late show. Was it all about the money, politics, or both?

And later, the Coldplay concert moment that has been seen around the world. And tonight, we have news on the CEO at the center of all of it.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:20:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Democrats capitalizing on the growing chasm in the Republican Party over the Epstein case with multiple lawmakers now calling for the release of all the files.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MELANIE STANSBURY (D-NM): You guys are so weak that you won't even vote to release the files.

REP. RO KHANNA (D-CA): Mr. Speaker, the American people, Republicans, independents, Democrats want the Epstein files released.

REP. JAMIE RASKIN (D-MD): We are asking for all of the records, the documents, and the investigative materials relating to Epstein and to Maxwell.

SEN. CORY BOOKER (D-NJ): Multiple members of the Trump administration went around and talked about this damning evidence, whipping people up. If they're not lying about that, then, yeah, this is a cover-up of very serious allegations and charges.

REP. JIM MCGOVERN (D-MA): Why would anybody want to stop this bill from getting a vote? What are Republicans so afraid of?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: While some Republicans are singing the same release the files tune, there is criticism among many in the GOP for why Democrats are only making these demands now.

Joining me now is Democratic California Congressman Eric Swalwell. Congressman Swalwell, good evening to you. Why is this issue top of mind for Democrats now?

REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D-CA): Well, Laura, actually, in July of 2019, I called on then Labor Secretary Andrew Acosta to resign for his role in the sweetheart deal for Jeffrey Epstein. So, I've always been on this. I know the oversight committee under Elijah Cummings, the late Elijah Cummings, they were covering this.

And the way Democrats are approaching this now is, well, you were promised, as the public, that these files would be released by Donald Trump. Pam Bondi said that she had the client list on her desk --

COATES: Uh-hmm.

SWALWELL: -- and now buried deep beneath the earth. So, if the Republicans are not up for subpoenaing these files, we will do their job because transparency has to be key and the American people want to know who should be held accountable for these acts of child sex trafficking.

COATES: You know some Republicans, congressman, have signed on to an effort to force a vote in the House aimed at releasing fully the Epstein files. Do you expect those Republicans to truly stay committed to that effort?

SWALWELL: We don't need that many of them. So, it's called a discharge petition. Probably the worst name in --

COATES: Hmm.

SWALWELL: -- any legislature terms that we have. But here's how it works. If 218 people, that's a majority in Congress, whether it's Republicans or Democrats, sign up to try and advance a bill, it has to receive a vote. Now, it has to -- quote -- "ripen," which means it's going to take a couple of weeks before it has to come for a vote on the floor. But you only need, because the margins are so thin, just a few Republicans, and I think there are seven Republicans so far.

So, if all 212 Democrats, and I will do this, sign up to release the files, you have enough votes to release the files, and then it's really on, you know, the president as to whether he's going to honor the will of a majority of the Congress.

COATES: An important point, obviously, given that there is a request to have grand jury testimony released. But that is just a fraction of the overall file that is potentially there. We're talking about the Epstein case more broadly. You have the Senate Judiciary Committee ranking Democrat, Dick Durbin.

[23:25:00]

He wrote a letter to the attorney general saying that his office was told the FBI -- that FBI personnel were instructed to flag any records in which President Trump was mentioned in the Epstein files. Now, you serve on the House Judiciary Committee. Have you heard anything similar, and what's your reaction to that claim?

SWALWELL: Well, it would explain to me why Donald Trump is willing to throw his supporters overboard to keep these files buried. And we are also open to and ready to receive any whistleblower testimony from folks at the Department of Justice, whether it's lawyers, FBI agents who have knowledge of what's going on over there.

But Laura, let me just flip this for a second. If you're Donald Trump and you have Elon Musk saying that you're in the files, and Mick Mulvaney, your former chief of staff, saying you're in the files, and Michael Wolff, your biographer, saying that you're not just in the files but there's some pretty disturbing things that you did with these underaged girls, wouldn't you want to clear your name?

And so, to me, an innocent person would do everything to get those files out there to show that the allegations are not true, and I think that's why his supporters are scratching their heads and saying, why won't he show us these files?

COATES: Congressman, today, Trump's longtime ally, Steve Bannon, said that he predicts the tide will turn back in Trump's favor because "The Wall Street Journal" body letter report is saying, and he told CNN, we are finally on offense. President Trump has had enough and is fighting back against his real enemies. Do you have any concerns that that article --

SWALWELL: Laura, it's absurd. Right? I mean, "The Wall Street Journal" is his enemy. The Wall Street Journal is owned by Rupert Murdoch, who owns Fox News, who has, for the last 10 years, done everything to help Donald Trump. So, now, because he doesn't like reporting from "The Wall Street Journal," they are now lumped in with "The New York Times" and other agencies that he perceives as liberal? It's just crazy when you step back and look at the way he frames this, which is if you're against him, you are a part of the hoax. "The Wall Street Journal" is a conservative newspaper. Period.

COATES: Do you have concerns that the voting public who wanted him to release all the files, who believed him when he says the media is the enemy and that there is a deep state, do you have concerns that -- that train cannot come back to the station now that he has planted those seeds?

SWALWELL: My concern is that Donald Trump will keep these files buried. I don't believe his supporters are going away. In the MAGA movement, if the MAGA movement was a cake, the Epstein files are the flower. And he's telling them to make a cake without flour. And they're saying, no, that's not how it works, we were promised that we would have all of these files.

And so, we're going to get them. Democrats will do the work Republicans aren't willing to do. And if Republicans don't join us and subpoena the files, we can promise that in a Democratic majority, we will get them, and we will get them without, you know, any protection of anyone who's in them.

Like, to me, this is about transparency more than protecting any individual. Right now, looks like the individual who wants to be most protected is Donald Trump.

COATES: Congressman Eric Swalwell, thank you.

SWALWELL: My pleasure. Thanks, Laura.

COATES: A U.S. citizen, an Army veteran arrested, held for multiple days without access to an attorney, caught up in an ICE raid he says he had no part in. He tells his story right here next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Get this. A man is on his way to work. When he drives up to the scene and there's chaos and there's protests and an ICE raid on a California cannabis farm, that's when things went wrong for U.S. citizen and Army veteran George Retes, Jr.

George works as a security guard at the Glass House Farms in Camarillo. And you can see his white car right here being blocked by a wall of agents. He exited his car and tried to tell the officers he was going to work legally as a citizen. Agents then surrounded his car banging on his windows. George, he tried to back away from the agents, but was pepper-sprayed, his car engulfed. He says he then was pinned down by two officers, and then arrested.

George was held for three days at the Metropolitan Detention Center in downtown Los Angeles. No charges were filed. He had no access to an attorney, and he missed his three-year-old daughter's birthday.

The Department of Homeland Security said in a statement, George Retes was arrested and he has been released. He has not been charged. The U.S. Attorney's Office is reviewing his case, along with dozens of others, for potential federal charges related to the execution of the federal search warrant in Camarillo.

George Retes, Jr. joins me now. George, thank you for being here. When I saw this story, I mean, it's hard to believe what you experienced because when you pulled up and you saw the chaos, what did you think was going on?

GEORGE RETES, JR., CITIZEN ARRESTED BY ICE IN CALIFORNIA RAID: I kind of -- I kind of put two and two together that a protest was happening.

[23:35:02]

I mean, the street was completely filled with people. It was a logjam. Cars lined up, people getting out their cars, and it was just a big crowd. So, I kind of figured what was going on when I pulled up and saw it.

COATES: But as you're pulling up, I mean, you're a citizen, you're a veteran --

RETES: Yes.

COATES: -- you weren't a part of the protest, you were trying to go to work. Did you tell the ICE officers all this when you spoke to them?

RETES: It was -- the first thing I said when I pulled up to them and asked them and told them everything, I told them I was a U.S. citizen, that I work there, that I was trying to get to work. I mentioned that I was a veteran. I told them all those things. I wasn't part of the protest. I'm not there to fight them. I'm just trying to get to work.

COATES: What did they say?

RETES: They didn't care. They all just started yelling at me and started getting hostile. They just started getting hostile.

COATES: And we see, as in the video, what's going on. The car engulfed and you were pepper-sprayed. You were also held for three days. There were no charges filed. You didn't have access to an attorney where you were held. What -- what were you told during those three days about why you were there and how long you might have to be there?

RETES: Um, I was told nothing, not a single thing.

COATES: Could you call somebody? Could you talk to anyone?

RETES: No. They didn't let me call anyone. They didn't let me talk to a lawyer. They didn't even let me shower when I was covered in tear gas and spray and my body was burning.

COATES: That's unbelievable to think, that you were denied those things. You have said that you were put on suicide watch. Can you tell us more about that?

RETES: Yes. Um, just dealing with that entire situation and what had happened -- what had happened with that entire incident that day. And then on top of all that, just knowing that I would miss my daughter's birthday. That was the big -- that was the biggest one for me. It's hard, if I'm being honest. Just knowing that I will never get that chance to -- to know that I wasn't there. I wasn't even able to get her a gift. So, it's a terrible feeling.

COATES: Of course. I can only imagine what you were thinking at that time. And you are a father of two young kids. Your daughter was turning three while you were detained. But George, keep going back to not only being a father and, of course, a human being, you are a veteran who served this country. When you look and reflect on how you were treated in that moment and what has happened just a week later, how are you feeling?

RETES: Um, I'm feeling -- um (INAUDIBLE). It just -- I just can't wrap my head around it. Um, I still can't wrap my head around it. Um, I missed a lot. Uh, I missed a lot when, uh, they locked me up. And there was just a lot to deal with and a lot that happened. Um, I just can't wrap my head around it, if I'm being honest with you.

COATES: Did you expect, when you said you were a veteran, to have been treated differently by the officers?

RETES: No. It shouldn't matter if I'm a veteran. It shouldn't matter if I was a citizen or not, or the color of my skin. No one should be treated that way at all, especially without questioning or just for no reason at all, just because their emotions got the best of them. No one should be treated that way.

COATES: George Retes, thank you for joining and sharing what has happened. I'm sorry that you have lost what you have. It's really shocking to all of us. Thank you.

RETES: Yeah. Thank you.

COATES: Ahead, losing money or losing favor? All the speculation surrounding the cancellation of Stephen Colbert's late show. We will speak with someone who used to work for Colbert next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEPHEN COLBERT, CBS HOST: Next year will be our last season. The network will be ending the late show in May.

(BOOEING)

(END VIDEO CLIP) COATES: Stephen Colbert's fans are booing that decision, of course. But President Trump is soaking it all up, posting on Truth Social -- quote -- "I absolutely love that Colbert got fired. His talent was even less than his ratings" -- unquote.

But while Colbert has been an outspoken critic of Trump for years, CBS is insisting its decision to cancel the top rated -- top rated, I might add again -- late show is -- quote -- "purely a financial decision."

[23:45:02]

Sources close to the network are telling our Brian Stelter that the show was losing money for years with no path to turning things around. But tonight, several Democratic lawmakers are still questioning whether politics may have indeed played a part. They note the merger that CBS's parent company, Paramount, needs the Trump administration to approve, and Colbert's most recent critique of Paramount's settlement with Trump, something he called a big, fat bribe, just a few days ago.

Joining me now, Pete Dominick, comedian and host of "Stand Up with Pete Dominick." He was Colbert's warm-up comic during "The Colbert Report." And Mike Leon, host of the "Can We Please Talk?" podcast and director of Strategy at the Free & Equal Elections Foundation. Glad to have both of you here.

I'll begin with you, Mike, on this because tonight, the Writers Guild of America released a statement saying that they're concerned this was a bribe meant to -- quote -- "curry favor with the Trump administration." So, tell me, what do you say about the current moment in politics that writers, comedians, are all expressing these concerns?

MIKE LEON, PODCAST HOST, DIRECTOR OF STRATEGY AT FREE & EQUAL ELECTIONS FOUNDATION: It says a lot, Laura. First off, good to see you. Thank you for having me as always. Look, I mean, you heard the president just say there in that Truth Social post that he was as bad as his ratings, and his ratings show that he was leading all late- night shows with 2.4 million in that demo.

So, clearly, this is not a ratings thing. Stephen Colbert just re- upped his contract in 2023 to make, you know, $15 million a year. It must be nice if you can loan me a little couple bucks. That'd be nice.

(LAUGHTER)

But this is purely a politically-motivated thing. I mean, like, you know, we're seeing a lot of the think pieces now, Laura, about is late night doom, is late night dying? No. First off, content repivots. Right? They have 10 million subscribers on their YouTube channel. Reformatting of the way a typical late-night show is done is now for the digital audience.

And I just think that -- I wish it's 2025. I wish Paramount was a little bit more transparent and just be like, look, unfortunately, we've got sued by the Trump administration, we are going to lose, we are going to a merger, and we let him go. I think people would appreciate that a lot more than this run around. And now, we got to read the tea leaves when we all know it wasn't fired for performance.

COATES: Well, certainly not performance. Right? I mean, obviously, I know he lived in the clock hour. It's not performance. He is dynamite.

LEON: Yeah.

COATES: Pete, my friend, what do you think? Because there is -- to just be fair, there is, and they did talk about, it is costly to put on a show like that. Are you buying that being the reason?

PETE DOMINICK, COMEDIAN: No, no, because they can lower the cost. Stephen could lower his salary. They could -- they could get rid of it or reduce the amazing band that they have. There are all kinds of -- they could move it from the Ed Sullivan Theater, all kinds of ways to control cost. It was still the cash cow for CBS.

I don't think anybody is buying this. I worked with and for Stephen for six years. And Colbert is, as anybody who knows him, he's as good and decent and smart and kind and funny and brilliant as anyone of our generation in entertainment and comedy, which is why tonight, Laura, I've come on your show, because you're my good friend, and with my heavy, heavy influence in America, I'm calling for my old friend, Stephen Colbert, to run for president, because I think this would be a great final act for him.

He's going to be around a lot longer than CBS. And I think he's a decent, good, moral man. He's going to spend the rest of his tenure at this show tearing down power as he always has spoken truth to power. Remember, back in 2006, the White House Correspondents Dinner with George W. Bush?

COATES: Uh-hmm.

DOMINICK: That put him on the map (INAUDIBLE) image as a real trailblazer and a brave guy who always punches up.

COATES: You know, I think you're serious about asking him to run for president. I know you well enough to know that you actually are. And I wonder what he will do with the months remaining in front of that camera. Will he really do all of his shows or not? I have questions about this.

But Mike, for years, the right has criticized these late-night shows, saying they only make Trump and Republicans the butt of their jokes. They don't give Democrats the same kind of scrutiny. We've seen this complaint. What is your response to now the celebration, at least from some on the right, about his ouster?

LEON: Well, I mean, they're giving him a lot of material, in fairness. I mean, Republicans give so much material. Pete knows this better than me. I mean, he's the one writing the jokes. I just tell jokes, you know, to my friends, Laura. And you're one of them, by the way.

(LAUGHTER)

But it's true. They're just -- like -- it is -- this is the problem with Republicans. Right? Like, there's a little scintilla of truth to some of the things that they say. But even Jay Leno used to talk about this back in the day, like, he would write his monologue and he would criticize Democratic and Republican administrations. He said this in interviews beyond this.

So, there's always -- if there's something to be made fun of and it's funny, because funny is funny, then they will make fun of it.

[23:49:58]

Right now, Republicans, especially with Donald Trump and -- you know, look at what's happening with just the Epstein files, for example. Now, they don't exist. Now, there is no desk that came by. That's funny. Like, there's material there. So, we're going to make fun of that. This is what the Colbert show is.

Look, I happen to know the people -- I used to work with the "Last Week Tonight with John Oliver" when I worked for HBO. Like, there's a lot of work that goes into it. The jokes write themselves sometimes. And -- but sometimes, things are funny and Republicans are giving them so much meat on that funny (INAUDIBLE).

COATES: Pete, Mike, stay with me. We're going to come right back. I want to hear more of your wit and your intelligence, both of you, my friends, because we've got to talk about what happens when a CEO and his head of H.R. walk into a Coldplay concert. Want to finish it? Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:55:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: So, if you so much as opened your phone within the last 24 hours, I'm going to have a hard time believing you haven't seen this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRIS MARTIN, SINGER (voice-over): Oh, look at these two. All right. What? Either they're having an affair or they're just very shy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Those 10 seconds lighting the internet on fire as they show an awkward moment between the CEO of tech company, Astronomer, cuddling up to his company's chief PEOPLE officer during a Coldplay concert in Boston, right until they realized they had made the kiss cam.

Well, tonight, we're learning that the CEO has been placed on leave. The company putting out this statement, saying -- quote -- "Our leaders are expected to set the standard in both conduct and accountability. The Board of Directors has initiated a formal investigation into this matter."

Pete Dominick and Mike Leon are back. First of all, what's your reaction? The internet is all over this, Pete. What do you say?

DOMINICK: I don't know. What do you guys think? Why is this getting so much attention? I honestly haven't seen anything get this kind of attention in this short period of time. I think it's in like 24 hours. I think if they do release the Epstein files, they should put them on the Jumbotron at a Coldplay concert.

(LAUGHTER)

My favorite response, somebody wrote on the internet, is that this story is absolutely unremarkable except how it managed to combine almost everything that's socially acceptable to hate brilliantly. H.R., Coldplay, cheaters, CEOs, and millionaires.

But I'm here to defend both Coldplay and these two people because what no one said on as huge a platform as the Laura Coates show is that maybe they were just doing team building exercise to better enhance the positive work environment. I know you think that is possible.

COATES: Maybe. Anything is possible in 2025. Mike, while you figure yourself together and laughing at Pete as I am, the person who captured, by the way, what we're seeing and turned into the viral moment on camera is now asking people to Venmo her to help pay off her student loans. This is where we really are in life. Mike?

LEON: Yeah. I love it. I'll happily send money. I look like I'm coming from a hotel right now where people have extramarital affairs. So, just ignore my background. I'm here with my wife, everybody. Just FYI. But, you know -- you know what's funny, Laura? You know I always come bearing data. Right?

COATES: Yes.

LEON: Forbes in 2024 did -- Forbes in 2024 did a survey of people in workplace romances. Sixty percent of the people in that survey engaged in workplace romances. Fifty percent at least flirted with a coworker. And in this survey, go to Forbes.com, read the survey, 43% of the people in this survey got married. So, like, this is -- this is something that happens.

Now, again, Pete is right. I don't get why it's getting so much attention. First off, no one knows who you people are. Don't duck.

(LAUGHTER)

Like, you don't need to duck. This is not a fire. Don't stop dropping the roll. Nobody knows who you guys are.

COATES: They don't have.

LEON: Just stand still and enjoy a Coldplay concert.

COATES: Look -- DOMINICK: I think Mike --

COATES: Go ahead. Go ahead, Pete.

DOMINICK: I think Mike should have to prove his wife is in that hotel room so he doesn't go viral.

COATES: Oh, God. I knew it. I knew -- I swear to you --

LEON: She's here.

COATES: I was -- I know it's going to happen. Look, I'm not getting in trouble with any of the wives. Pete, Mike, good night. I believe you both. Thank you all.

DOMINICK: Let's see it, Mike. Where is your wife?

LEON: She's here, Pete.

COATES: We are all going to consciously uncouple right now. Thank you for watching. Before we go tonight, a look at the new episode of "The Whole Story with Anderson Cooper," where some of the biggest names in music speak out on how star power can combat a crisis. Be sure to tune in on Sunday at 8 p.m. Eastern.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN: That's cool. That's a little crayfish.

UNKNOWN (voice-over): The tools (ph) we love come from both person and place. And without this place, without the sun and soil, waves and wonder of Oahu's north shore, Jack wouldn't be Jack.

JACK: I think growing up here, there's this really slow rhythm that you don't realize you're taking in, which is the sound of waves hitting the shore. And usually, that's about 12 seconds, 14 seconds apart.

UNKNOWN (voice-over): But while plenty of places have an ocean rhythm, Jack was also raised on aloha, the humble respect for nature and neighbor passed down from the very first Hawaiians.

(MUSIC PLAYING)

UNKNOWN (voice-over): Right around the time Flake started drawing bigger crowds, that Hawaiian sense of responsibility would gnaw at his soul.

[00:00:00]

JACK: Going back to those early (ph) shows when you have this sort of awakenings, you know, it's like everything is great, and it's like what a night. And then you walk out on the stage after everybody is gone and you just see a sea of plastic water bottles.

And all of sudden you're at an amphitheater. And you look out back and you realize, well, there's multiple trucks here, there's multiple buses. This is a footprint, an environmental footprint that's kind of bigger than I realized. All of a sudden, it gets here. And it's a little wake-up call of, okay, how can we do better? What can we do?

(END VIDEO CLIP)